+ 1 ( reading reports at stage takes time should be used to answer questions) - But let´s remember , to read previously the reports, those shall not consider the F2F meeting activities ( or people would have only Thursday night to do so) Hence, asking question is the most interesting way to get knowledge about what is really going on with other groups (nobody has enough time to follow all groups) Resuming: the general reports previously sent will give you a good feeling about the 3 months activities from each group + question F@F will give you what was up dated in the meeting if you want to know about specifics issues. It is practical, saving community time - after all, that is the reason meetings exist. Best to all -----Mensagem original----- De: at-large-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org [mailto:at-large-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org] Em nome de Roberto Gaetano Enviada em: quarta-feira, 9 de maio de 2012 16:32 Para: At Large Assunto: Re: [At-Large] Public Board Meeting - the Update for Prague Olivier,Just a clarification.I wrote that the reports could be distributed beforehand and discussed (if there are any questions) back to back to the Public Forum: I maintain that this can be done without harm. The discussion/vote on substantial matters is a completely different story. I am with you in defending the lively debate that is going on at meetings, and I agree that the new format must make it possible for the Board to make a decision taking full consideration of the debate.This is an essential part of the ICANN process, and for this reason I disagree with Karl when he regards the way ICANN meeting are conducted (face-to-face rotating in different parts of the worrld) as useless. Quite the contrary, I believe that we should move towards having more interaction with the internet community worldwide, and to give more the opportunity to the Board to take decisions after having carefully taken into account the debate.Cheers,R. > Date: Tue, 8 May 2012 17:20:07 +0100
From: ocl@gih.com To: at-large@atlarge-lists.icann.org Subject: Re: [At-Large] Public Board Meeting - the Update for Prague
Dear Roberto,
good to hear from you here!
On 07/05/2012 21:58, Roberto Gaetano wrote :
While on the Board I have argued often that those could be written beforehand and distributed, leaving the prime time at the plenary only for questions and answers on the repor! ts. This must not necessarily take place after the public forum, and t herefore Friday, but can also take place on Thursday before the public forum
One problem I have with the Board reports/vote being done either right after the public forum or before it, is that Board members will not act directly on what they've heard in the public forum. In San Francisco, opponents to .XXX took an impressive 30 minutes to explain their case. It was fascinating to see ICANN "outsiders" put their point across to the Board and I hope that the Board took this into account in their voting the next day. I am sure much discussion took place on the Board closed meeting on Thursday night before all Board members made their choice. That said, of course, I don't believe that Board member choices were made solely on what they had heard in the public forum, but at least, the public forum was taken into account. I am not sure how this will take place now.
Kind regards,
Olivier
-- Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond, PhD http://www.gih.com/ocl.html
_______________________________________________ At-Large mailing list At-Large@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large
At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org
_______________________________________________ At-Large mailing list At-Large@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org